MPs call for new committee to review transfer of EU law into UK

The British House of Commons’ procedure committee today called for a new committee to review EU legislation transferred into U.K. law, saying the current proposal for parliamentary scrutiny was “inadequate.”

The procedure committee, which makes recommendations for how business should be conducted in the House of Commons, said there should be a new “sifting committee” to decide which legislation under the EU (Withdrawal) Bill needs further evaluation by MPs.

The government wanted to allow ministers to decide which aspects of EU law would be scrutinized by MPs as it is transferred back into U.K. law.

“The process of enacting over four decades’ worth of European legislation into U.K. domestic law, in little more than 12 months,” is one of the greatest legislative challenges the British parliament has faced, said Charles Walker, chair of the procedure committee, in a statement.

“The government’s current proposals for parliamentary scrutiny do not go far enough.”

The procedure committee said it conducted an inquiry that revealed “cross-party concerns about the government’s decision to propose no change to the present arrangements for scrutiny of delegated legislation in the Commons,” and to leave the choice of what should be debated up to ministers.

The proposed sifting committee would have the power to recommend the withdrawal or redrafting of statutory instruments, which allow acts of parliament to be brought into force or altered without parliament having to pass a new act.

Authors:

Related stories on these topics:

kermelen

Democracy is not a matter of plebiscite votes but of separation of powers.

The elected Parliament is sovereign and makes the Law. Government solely power is to apply the Law voted by Parliament.

A sub-commission built in secrecy to work around a lack of Tories majority in the House of Commons has no legitimacy to silence the elected Parliament.

When a governement is trying every ruse to by-pass Parliament, to make the Law by itself directly, it is actually harming democracy. Even if doing so with the best of intentions, the damage would be irreversible. This should not be allowed. Is the elected Parliament sovereign enough to decide by itself how it should make the Law?

Posted on 11/6/17 | 9:59 AM CET

Steuersklave

@ kermelen

‘When a governement is trying every ruse to by-pass Parliament, to make the Law by itself directly, it is actually harming democracy. Even if doing so with the best of intentions, the damage would be irreversible. This should not be allowed. Is the elected Parliament sovereign enough to decide by itself how it should make the Law?’

For more than 40 years since the UK joined then then EEC, the UK Parliament has had absolutely no direct say in the EU laws which the British government is now transferring to the UK statute books. Now for the first time all EU legislation is coming into British law (which will give Parliament the power to amend or improve legislation as part of the general divergence from EU regulations), you attack this process as ‘undemocratic’. How ironic!

Posted on 11/6/17 | 11:15 AM CET

Capt Europe

I fear for the Rule of Law after brexit. The right to be tried by ones peers and prohibiting detention without charge are in grave danger once the European Court of Justice loses jurisdiction and left on the hands of inexperienced British politicians What were the British thinking

Posted on 11/6/17 | 11:41 AM CET

Vishnou

So, there you go: proposing to interpret and therefore manipulate the Rule of Law.

Posted on 11/6/17 | 12:47 PM CET

Steuersklave

@ Capt Europe

What nonsense you write.

Posted on 11/6/17 | 12:51 PM CET

Dixie Normus

@Vishnou
“So, there you go: proposing to interpret and therefore manipulate the Rule of Law.”

If you want to force EU laws on a sovereign country I suspect you would have to invade it and rule it for your self just like the n@azis did. Are you going to try Russia or America first?
I will say nothing about Poland and its judges.

Posted on 11/6/17 | 1:29 PM CET

Jaun Kerr

@Vishnou

No, it is only ‘yEUr’ laws that restrict us from doing business outside the EU, or laws that are to the detriment of our sovereignty that we intend to manipulate. Nothing ‘spooky’ about that.
I will say nothing about Poles and their judges.

Posted on 11/6/17 | 1:48 PM CET

Black Bob

Do these EB-bots represent an example of the average IQ of Europeans?
However will they cope without the UK?

Posted on 11/6/17 | 2:04 PM CET

bluebell

@Capt Europe
“I fear for the Rule of Law after brexit. The right to be tried by ones peers and prohibiting detention without charge are in grave danger once the European Court of Justice loses jurisdiction and left on the hands of inexperienced British politicians What were the British thinking”

I thank you for your concern but I would say that your fear is without foundation. The ECJ is a politicised institution NOT an independent body (as some of their rulings have demonstrated previously) and that the British judicial system has a long tradition of being independent.

Unlike some of the relatively recent written constitutions in Europe (post 1945) the UK’s constitution (although unwritten) has a very, very long history by comparison and independence of the judiciary together with freedom of the press are very firmly embedded.

So worry not because if the UK politicians ‘screw up’ the judiciary will set them to rights.

Posted on 11/6/17 | 2:07 PM CET

Larry

@Vishnou
“So, there you go: proposing to interpret and therefore manipulate the Rule of Law.”

Sorry mate, that is a proper dum_b thing to say. Interpreting the Rule of Law is what happens in every parliament and every court in the world every single. Trying to comment negatively to every single UK article will cause you to have these brain farts. Pace yourself.

Posted on 11/6/17 | 3:43 PM CET

Larry

*every single [day]

Posted on 11/6/17 | 3:45 PM CET

Dan

Steuersklave
@Capt Europe comes out with some funny stuff, he/she mostly posts contrary/sarcastic messages, viewed this way you might see the funny side of a lot of them. Well, I think they do!

Posted on 11/6/17 | 3:59 PM CET

Capt Europe

Hi Dan, thanks, the glorious revolution of 1215 created the rule of law eg right to trail by jury. The EU keeps going on about respecting the rule of law yet doesn’t have jury trials and they actually detain ppl without charge

Posted on 11/6/17 | 4:09 PM CET

Dan

@Capt Europe

At your most sardonic you could easily be mistaken for an EUBot. Damn you’re good 😀

Posted on 11/6/17 | 4:30 PM CET

Dijkstra

It’s fortuitious that Great Britain is an island. When it all comes undone in a few year’s time like it did with Venezuela it will be much easier to contain uncontrolled migration to the EU thanks to your own actions.

Golf clap.

Posted on 11/6/17 | 4:50 PM CET

Dijkstra

Apologies for some bad spelling.

Still golf clap.

Posted on 11/6/17 | 4:52 PM CET

Arran

@Dijkstra
“It’s fortuitious that Great Britain is an island. When it all comes undone in a few year’s time like it did with Venezuela it will be much easier to contain uncontrolled migration to the EU thanks to your own actions.”

Yeah, that’s the sort of cr@p we’re talking about. Nice example.

“Still golf clap” ??

Posted on 11/6/17 | 5:47 PM CET

Europeann

As a double-european citizen, I say it should be the other way around. The UK´s laws should be brought into line with EU laws. That is, if the UK wants to remain in the EU — with their cherry-picking trade deals.

Posted on 11/6/17 | 6:18 PM CET

Stan

Europeann
“As a double-european citizen”

Ah, that’s how you can manage to talk twice as much cr@p as most others…

Posted on 11/6/17 | 6:33 PM CET

Europeann

Won´t the Brits endlessly leave the EU? With NO Trade deals. They must fend for themselves with their Prince Charles marmalade. Better products they don´t have!

Posted on 11/6/17 | 6:37 PM CET

Anne

So what is the point?

Britain is leaving the EU.
Then it proceeds to copy-paste all EU laws and regulations.
And replicate EU agencies.
And duplicate all EU trade deals with other countries.

The only plus side is that newly bloated British bureaucracy will need to employ more people (probably EU nationals since Britain has an expertise shortage).

Posted on 11/6/17 | 7:36 PM CET

Europeann

When will the Little Englanders have the courage to leave the EU WITHOUT trade deals? The Little Englanders can go to Timbuktu with their wares. And send Boris Jonhson as Embassador to Timbuktu for English trade — a type of modern Lawlerence of Arabia for Africa. The Brits, who don´t want to be a part of the EU have only their littlle, little colonies. For the bigger ones, Australia and New Zealend, have long become successful countries on their own — with immigrants!

Posted on 11/6/17 | 7:40 PM CET

Steuersklave

@ Anne

The point is very simple and glaringly obvious if you give the matter a few seconds’ thought. From midnight on 29 March 2019 EU laws will no longer be valid in the UK. The clock is ticking and the only thing that can be done to avoid legal anarchy is to transfer all current EU laws and regulations into UK law. This is the only way to guarantee that the UK has a fully functioning legal system on Brexit day.

Over time the UK will be free to improve on EU laws in the UK, reinforcing the good ones and abolishing or amending the bad ones. But that is for the future. Right now the UK needs to avoid legal anarchy.

Posted on 11/6/17 | 8:08 PM CET

xyc

Meantime, UKGov can’t publish the Brexit studies. They have gone missing it seems. Got mixed up between “Debbie does Dallas” and other similar studies on Damian Green’s parliamentary PC. Aw, shame.

Posted on 11/6/17 | 11:05 PM CET

xyc

Interesting comments from Wilbur Ross to the CBI, that the UK will have to scrap inherited EU regulations and become much more aligned to US regulations to get a trade deal. That does not augur well for any remaining fantasy of UK_EU frictionless borders…

Posted on 11/6/17 | 11:58 PM CET

Europeass

Europeann
As a double-european r’s ole, I say it should be the other way around. The UK´s laws should be brought into the EU laws. That is, if the UK wants to leave the EU — with their cotton-picking trade deals

Posted on 11/7/17 | 12:16 AM CET

Europeass

When will the Little Englanders have the courage to leave the EU WITHOUT trade deals? The Little Englanders can go to Timbuktu with their wares. And send Boris Jonhson as Embassador to Timbuktu for English trade — a type of modern Lawlerence of Arabia for Africa. The Brits, who don´t want to be a part of the EU have only their littlle, little colonies. For the bigger ones, Australia and New Zealend, have long become successful countries on their own — with immigrants like me to enhance them and bring them joy. Little little little tiny England with their rocky road cake and pastie puddings, oh what traitors drinking their tea.

Posted on 11/7/17 | 12:20 AM CET

Europeass

Won´t the Brits endlessly leave the EU? With NO croissants for their marmalade. They must fend for themselves with their Prince Charles marmalade against the world’s best militaries. Better products they don´t have! The jam is delicious the TRAITORS but won’t stop a cruise missile up the THAMES. DEFECTORS.

Posted on 11/7/17 | 12:26 AM CET

Europeass

Oh we’ll make our own fish and chip make no mistake little England with your vinegar, that is, if the UK wants to remain in the EU. Won´t the Brits endlessly leave the EU? With NO Trade deals. The Brits, who don´t want to be a part of the EU have only their tight littlle, little colons. Wwwwwot a fakking lllliberty!

Posted on 11/7/17 | 12:32 AM CET

Jack Boot

@xyc
“The UK will have to scrap inherited EU regulations and become much more aligned to US regulations to get a trade deal. That does not augur well for any remaining fantasy of UK_EU frictionless borders…”

The UK will delete/change/modify/create laws that suite the UK (not the EU).
If it is in the UK’s interest to pursue a trade deal with the US then that’s a decision for the UK. If the UK decides to accept chlorinated chicken from the US then that has nothing whatsoever to do with the EU. If the EU doesn’t like it then that’s tough for the EU and I suppose that would be the end of the EU-UK chicken trade. 🙂 It would only be your loss, I will still have chicken. (its not just about chicken).
But lets be honest, I’d rather eat chlorinated chicken from the US than infected chicken and eggs from the EU. To say nothing of the heavily infected pork (hepatitis) or BSE beef from France and Germany..

Posted on 11/7/17 | 11:16 AM CET

Dixie Normus

@Europeann
“As a double-european citizen, I say it should be the other way around. The UK´s laws should be brought into line with EU laws. That is, if the UK wants to remain in the EU — with their cherry-picking trade deals.”

All you arguments revolve around the assumption that the UK needs the ‘UK-EU relationship’ to remain exactly the same. The UK does not want to maintain the ‘status quo’ that works in the favour of the EU. That’s why the UK is leaving the EU..
It does of course want a trade deal with the EU. And logically (since we are currently part of it), the first trade deal should be with the EU, its also obvious that the EU also needs a deal with the UK.
Times are changing, accept it and try to keep up.

Posted on 11/7/17 | 11:39 AM CET

Anthony Chambers

What is still amazing to me is that some people here still believe that the UK will not be leaving the EU in 2019. Wake up and pull your heads out of the sand. The UK is leaving, get over it.

Posted on 11/7/17 | 4:26 PM CET

Peter G

Remind me again, the British government is proposing a vast omnibus piece of legislation to make British law compliant with EU law why precisely? Why would they think this was necessary?

Posted on 11/7/17 | 8:10 PM CET

Peter G

You know what’s also very very obvious Dixie Normous? That Britain needs a trade deal much much more than the EU does. The harm the EU will incur from not having a deal will be spread over a lot of countries. The harm Britain will get is all theirs. Which answers my own rhetorical question. The British parliament has to to be EU compliant just like Norway does or bad things will happen.

Posted on 11/7/17 | 9:31 PM CET

Dan

@Peter G
“Remind me again, the British government is proposing a vast omnibus piece of legislation to make British law compliant with EU law why precisely? Why would they think this was necessary?”

It is perfectly obvious why it is necessary. Many factors rely on those pieces of legislation and the most expedient way of providing continuity is to enshrine them into UK law lock stock and sift through in time. Without this 40 odd years of legislation would cease to apply on brexit.

Posted on 11/8/17 | 1:23 AM CET

Dixie Normus

@Peter G
“You know what’s also very very obvious Dixie Normous? That Britain needs a trade deal much much more than the EU does. ”

You do talk rubbish. The EU needs a trade deal with the UK. The UK needs a trade deal with the EU. The UK also needs to make trade deals with everyone. There is no point talking to the EU when they want the same as they have now and also tie into UK politics under foreign policy, security, limiting UK abilities to trade with other countries. They want to tie the UK to the EU without offering anything in return. That’s what they want, now talk about what the UK wants. Any deal with the EU would be far too ‘invasive’ and they would drag out negotiations (and payments) for the next 20 years. The UK has to leave in 2019 with an ‘interim’ trade deal that includes services.

Posted on 11/8/17 | 8:20 AM CET

Peter G

No Dixie. Europe could use a trade deal, a carefully constructed one that their members can form a consensus on. In the fullness of time subject to careful consideration. One cannot be too hasty. Britain needed one a month ago. Hence the constant urging by Britain for speedier and continuous negotiations on outstanding issues before trade is considered. The EU does not appear to be in a hurry do they?

Posted on 11/8/17 | 6:29 PM CET

Dixie Normus

@Peter G

If the EU cannot meet the article 50 deadlines then they would be wise to offer an ‘interim’ trade agreement. In which trade continues on current terms (less any UK contributions). while sections are gradually replaced (on a part by part basis) until a comprehensive agreement is in place.